Sanctity of Life Day

Today marks the 40th anniversary of the two most tragic Supreme Court decisions in American history, Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. Those decisions sparked a contentious debate between those who would deny that babies in the womb are worthy of legal protection, and those who rightly acknowledge that those babies constitute "life" as understood throughout history and affirmed in our Declaration of Independence. That right has been tragically denied to countless millions of unborn children who have been sacrificed on the altar of "choice" since 1973.
Roe v. Wade was the infamous Texas case where Norma McCorvey was used as a plaintiff by Leftist attorneys to overturn laws restricting abortions in Texas, and ultimately on appeal to the Supreme Court, found a heretofore unprecedented "right to privacy" in the so-called "due process clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Despotic Branch" divined from their "living constitution" that this right entitled a mother to end the life of her baby before its birth.
Simultaneous with Roe v. Wade, in Doe v. Bolton, using the plaintiff Sandra Cano, the Supremes determined that any complaint -- including headaches -- could be used as grounds for requesting an abortion.
Since the decisions in those cases, both McCorvey and Cano have recanted their testimony. Norma McCorvey said plainly, "I think abortion's wrong. I think what I did with Roe v. Wade was wrong," and she has stood by those words in the years since.
Sandra Cano, in her 2005 testimony before the U.S. Senate, said: "Using my name and life, Doe v. Bolton falsely created the health exception that led to abortion on demand and partial birth abortion. How it got there is still pretty much a mystery to me. I only sought legal assistance to get a divorce from my husband and to get my children from foster care. ... At no time did I ever have an abortion. I did not seek an abortion nor do I believe in abortion. Yet my name and life is now forever linked with the slaughter of 40-50 million babies. ... How can cunning, wicked lawyers use an uneducated, defenseless pregnant woman to twist the American court system in such a fraudulent way? Doe has been a nightmare. ... My name, life, and identity have been stolen and put on this case without my knowledge and against my wishes. How dare they use my name and my life this way! One of the Justices of the Supreme Court said during oral argument in my case 'What does it matter if she is real or not.' Well I am real and it does matter."
So are the babies who have been ripped from wombs.
Both women have been guests in my home. They are good and decent people who at a very vulnerable time in their lives were used by Leftist jurists to advance a horrendous agenda. Both women were instrumental in the establishment of the National Memorial for the Unborn, and their respective statements on abortion are enshrined there.
Celebrating the occasion last year, Barack Hussein Obama said, "[W]e must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman's health and reproductive freedom but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman's right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right. ... As we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams."
And I repeat, millions of babies sacrificed on the altar of "choice" in the name of freedom...
The Órko tou Ippokrátiis, commonly called the Physicians Hippocratic Oath, dates back to 500 BC. It is the first known physician's oath, and the essential message, "Do all to heal and do no harm," was and remains a seminal statement of moral of conduct for physicians.
The Oath's first and foremost standard of care translates, "I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone. I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion."
It has always been evident, scientifically and morally, that life begins at conception. For the last word on the matter, we consult our Creator's guidebook. The Psalmist wrote, "For You formed my inward parts; you wove me in my mother's womb." He then noted, "Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; and in Your book were written all the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them."

Pro-Life Reflections for February 4

REFLECTION:

Abortion advocates say we should "trust" women to make their own decisions.  Are we then to simply trust that people won't lie, cheat, run red lights, or rob a local store?

At times, people do not respect the rights of others.  That's why laws exist.

PRAYER:

Lord, with St. Paul, I acknowledge that I am inclined to sin despite my best intentions.  Help me as I struggle against evil.

Witnesses to abortion reveal its horrors

By Sarah Terzo

 

Sometimes authors of magazines are allowed to witness abortions in the course of writing articles. Sometimes medical students who never had an opinion on abortion come to grips with the procedure after viewing one. People who observe abortion procedures or abortion remains usually come away with little doubt that abortion is killing a human being.

Author Verlyn Klinkenborg of Harper’s Magazine visited an abortion clinic for a 1995 article. After viewing the remains of an abortion at ten weeks, he wrote the following (1):

I felt a profound and unmistakable kinship with the foot and hand in the tray, a kinship so strong it was like the rolling of the sea under my feet[.] … I was surprised by my own sadness, by the sense of loss that I felt[.] … I found it so much easier to be moved by the sight of the disembodied hand the size of a question mark gleaming under fluorescent lights. … In that tiny, naked hand there was the imputation of innocence.

Author Sue Hertz spent a year observing in a busy abortion clinic. She saw the remains of several abortions (2):

It was easy to shrug off an aborted pregnancy as nothing more than a sack of blood and globs of tissue – as many pro-choice activists did- if one never saw fetal remains, or products of conception (POC) as they were known in medical circles. But the nurses, medical assistants, and doctors who worked inside procedure rooms … knew that an eleven-week-old POC harbored tiny arms and legs and feet with toes. At twelve weeks, those tiny hands had tiny nails. Although the fetal head was too small at this stage to withstand the evacuation machine’s suction, pieces of face- a nose and mouth, or a black eye…were sometimes found in the aftermath[.] … Later abortions spawned even more gruesome fetal remains … the head did not come out whole during the evacuation, but the legs and arms and rib cage made it through intact. The hand of a second trimester fetus, as a Preterm doctor described it, seemed big enough to shake.

 article continues here

 

Sarah Terzo is a pro-life Liberal who runs ClinicQuotes.com, a web site devoted to exposing the abortion industry. This first appeared at http://liveactionnews.org/witnesses-to-abortion-reveal-its-horrors/ 

New York Governor Wants Law for More Late-Term Abortions

by Carol Tobias 

If you saw the news about New York’s governor proposing that his state do even more late abortions, you were probably shocked, but maybe not surprised.

Shocked because New York is already considered the abortion capital of the United States. But perhaps not surprised because we’ve seen the pro-abortion movement grow even more emboldened in recent months in their advocacy of brutal late abortions.

In a recent press conference, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a potential candidate for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016, voiced his support for a new “reproductive health” law. New York currently bans abortion after 24 weeks, except to save the life of the mother. Cuomo wants to eliminate that restriction and allow abortion throughout pregnancy – up until birth – if the abortion is done for “health” reasons.

 Court precedents allow the determination of what constitutes a “health” reason to reside entirely with the abortionist and those he works with. The courts have said even social or economic situations can constitute “health” reasons. In other words, a health exception would essentially mean any abortion could be done.

Because New York is a center for late abortions, it is critically important the state not eliminate its 24-week ban. A Planned Parenthood clinic there has advertised abortions up until 24 weeks. Abortion facilities might well do abortions even later for so-called “health” reasons if given the chance. In one notorious case in New York, an abortionist named Abu Hayat severed the arm of an unborn baby girl who was well over 24 weeks. The girl, Ana Rosa Rodriquez, survived the abortion, but Hayat was convicted and sentenced to prison. Yet Cuomo would remove even the minimal protection for unborn babies in state law that led to his conviction.

article continues here

click here for dangers and risks of late term abortions

AND HE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW

By Joe Wall

It was a cold winter morning.   A recent snowfall covered the ground; an icy wind whipped across the wide boulevard cutting the face of the man pacing back and forth on the sidewalk. He was engaged in his usal Saturday morning occupation, a rosary vigil at an abortion chamber.

This chamber, the Northeast Women's Center, located in Philadelphia, PA, was on the third floor of the small office building.  He had spent several hours every Saturday praying the rosary for the unborn babies being brought in to be killed.  He prayed too for their mothers, usually frightened young girls.  He had tried and tried to interest others in coming to the vigils.  Sometimes, he was successful, and two, three, four people would join him.  But, all too often, as on this Saturday, he was alone.

The loneliness, even more so the apathy, the heartlessness of his fellow Catholics, was beginning to wear him down.  As he walked back and forth, fingering his beads, frozen to the bone, he wondered if it was all worthwhile, if anybody cared, if his efforts really made a difference.

This morning, particularly, an almost unbearable sense of defeat and depression weighed him down.  Fighting it, he knelt in the snow, on the lawn between the building and the sidewalk, to say his next rosary.  He hoped that, somehow, this added bit of hardship would help.  Oddly enough, it did and, after finishing the rosary, he arose with a lighter heart. He completed his vigil that day and went on to continue them for many years thereafter.

What he didn't know was that as he knelt there in the snow, praying, a young woman was watching from a window on the third floor.  She was waiting to be brought into the procedure room for her abortion.  Sad to relate, she did have the abortion that day.  And, as often happens, she found pregnant again a few months latter.  Once more, she was face with an agonizing decision.  The memory of that day at the clinic came back to her; she could not forget the sight of that lone man kneeling in the snow, praying for her and her baby. She decided that if a stranger could care that much for her baby, so could she.  She would let the baby live.

That day, by his presence and the simple act of kneeling in prayer, he had saved a child's life...and he didn't even know!

This is a true story.  Longtime pro-life counselor Jean Neary told it to me on a radio show twelve years later.  She had heart it from the young woman who had come to her for counseling during her successful pregnancy.

To learn the other side of the story, I didn't have to question the man who had knelt in the snow that day so long ago, as it was me!

Scouts' Honor: Help Defend Scoutmaster Policy

 From Brian S. Brown, President, National Organization for Marriage

For over a century, the Boy Scouts of America have stood for honor and traditional Judeo-Christian values, and taught millions of young people leadership and life skills by faithfully applying those values in their own lives. It's not surprising that advocates of alternative "values," such as gay and lesbian activists, would challenge these traditional family values. Indeed, homosexual activists argued that the Boy Scouts should change their values and allow openly homosexual men to serve as scoutmasters with the responsibility of mentoring impressionable youth.

But thirteen years ago, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, the Supreme Court of the United states upheld the right of the Boy Scouts to make their own decisions about membership, despite a New Jersey law that would have required them to accept an openly homosexual Scoutmaster.

The Scouts won that fight, but only because they were able to demonstrate to the Supreme Court that they had a consistent national policy against having homosexual scoutmasters.

Today, in the face of relentless demands by homosexual activists, facing potential loss of corporate donations from companies themselves pressured by the powerful gay lobby, and even facing internal pressure from Corporate CEOs on their Board, the Scouts are considering a proposal to abandon their longstanding national policy, and instead leaving the decision of allowing homosexual scout leaders to each individual council.

As we know from the marriage battle, capitulation is not a strategy for preserving our cherished values. When homosexual activists demanded "rights" and "benefits" many well-meaning policymakers responded with "civil unions" and "domestic partnerships," believing that this "compromise" would preserve marriage while providing tangible benefits for same-sex couples. Though many in the gay community lobbied for these changes, once enacted the y quickly adopted a strategy of condemning them as "second class" and used them to successful ly file lawsuits redefining marriage.

Even though their supporters have relentlessly pressured the Boy Scouts to admit openly homosexual men as scoutmasters with the responsibility of mentoring America's youth, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) now says the "compromise" the Boy Scouts are considering does not go nearly far enough.

They will settle for nothing short of capitulation – homosexuality-affirming troops in every locale across America, tolerating no exceptions, period. Any parent or young man who holds a traditional Judeo-Christian view of sexual morality will be attacked as bigoted and accused of discriminatory conduct. You can imagine the lawsuits that will follow.

The BSA Board of Directors will be voting very soon on this new policy proposal — perhaps as early as Monday — and they are seeking public input into their decision. We need to make it clear that compromising honorable values is no path to organizational victory.

Gay marriage advocates are pulling out all the stops on this one, and it is imperative that the Scouts hear from you today!

There are many ways to make your voice heard, but right now phone calls are the most important.

Please call the Scouts National Headquarters at 972-580-2000 or 972-580-2330.

The phone lines are flooded right now, so please keep trying if you have trouble getting through. When they answer the phone, simply tell them that you are AGAINST the proposed policy change.

In addition, we are reaching out directly to the members of the BSA Board of Directors who will be making this decision next week. Below is a partial list of board members — please call as many as you can and politely urge them to maintain their current policy with respect to homosexual scoutmasters, and not to sacrifice their longstanding moral beliefs in favor of political correctness or activist pressure.

This is a long list of phone numbers, but even a few phone calls could make a big difference! Please take a few minutes to make as many calls as you are able.

Togo D. West, Jr.	(202) 775-1775
David M. Weekley	(713) 659-8111
Rex W. Tillerson	(972) 444-1000
Marshall M. Sloane	(781) 395-3000
Roger M. Schrimp	(209) 526-3500
Nathan O. Rosenberg	(949) 494-4553
Matthew K. Rose	(909) 386-4140
Robert H. Reynolds	(317) 231-7227
Tico A. Perez	(407) 849-1235
Arthur F. Oppenheimer	(208) 343-4883
Scott D. Oki	(425) 454-2800
Francis R. McAllister	(406) 373-8700
Joseph P. Landy	(212) 878-0600
Robert J. LaFortune	(918) 582-2981
Larry W. Kellner	(713) 468-4050
Stephen Hemsley	(800) 328-5979
Aubrey B. Harwell Jr.	(615) 244-1713
Earl G. Graves	(212) 242-8000
T. Michael Goodrich	(205) 328-9445 ext. 200
Jack D. Furst	(972) 982-8250
R. Michael Daniel	(412) 297-4989
John C. Cushman III	(904) 393-9020
William F. "Rick" Cronk	(925) 283-7229
Keith A. Clark	(717) 763-1121
R. Thomas Buffenbarger	(310) 967-4500
David L. Beck	(801) 240-1000

Finally, once you've made as many phone calls as you can, please help spread the word by email and social media.

• Use this link to send an email to the Scouts using your own brief letter or the pre-drafted sample letter that we have provided.
• Leave a comment on the Scouts' Facebook page
• Tweet your support for the existing policy (@boyscouts)
• Forward this message to family and friends!

If the Boy Scouts repudiate their national policy and leave the issue up to each individual council, it is quite likely that any individual council which adheres to the old policy will find themselves facing a new lawsuit claiming they are violating their state's nondiscrimination laws. It will only be a matter of time before homosexuality will be embraced in scouting — voluntarily or by court decree — as the "new normal."

Don't let it happen!

related article 

 Dr. Eastman, a constitutional law professor at Chapman University and Chairman of the Board of the National Organization for Marriage, is, like his grandfather before him, an Eagle Scout, and served as a volunteer adult leader in the Boy Scouts as a Cub Scout Den Leader, Cubmaster, and Assistant Scoutmaster as his son advanced through the ranks to become an Eagle Scout as well.

On Abortion Rights Activism

Jessica González-Rojas and Lynn Paltrow on Abortion Rights Activism

January 25, 2013

As we note the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Bill discusses the fierce challenges facing the reproductive rights movement with Jessica González-Rojas, Executive Director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, and Lynn Paltrow, founder and Executive Director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women. Though a majority of Americans now believe abortion should be legal in most cases, anti-abortion forces showing no sign of relenting. A study by the Guttmacher Institute reported that state legislatures passed 92 provisions restricting a woman’s access to reproductive health care in 2011 — a number four times higher than the previous year.
“What’s happened is that women are beginning to recognize that what’s at stake is more than abortion,” Paltrow tells Bill. “It is their personhood — their ability to be full, equal, constitutional persons in the United States of America.”

Pro-Life Reflection for February 3

REFLECTION:

Some abortion advocates oppose "litmus tests" for judges.  But if a judge had written an opinion about why women should not have the right to vote, wouldn't that be enough to disqualify him from being confirmed?

The fact is that we use litmus tests all the time, because certain lines should never be crossed.  The killing of children by abortion is one of them. 

PRAYER:

Lord, Judge of all, give wisdom to those entrusted with the task of human judgement, and let those who select them be guided by Your righteousness.

Sandra Fluke: Opposing Birth Control Coverage Like Opposing Leukemia Coverage

Pro-abortion activist Sandra Fluke is so obsessed with the government forcing religious groups to pay for her birth control and contraception that she compared opposing it in an interview this afternoon to opposing coverage for leukemia.

Never mind that opposing government spending taxpayer funds on forcing groups with religious objections to pay for birth control and abortion-causing drugs has nothing to do with supporting legitimate health care for patients suffering from the blood or bone marrow cancer that is deadly for adults and children alike.

“If you take a step back and think about that, you work at a restaurant or you work at a store, and your boss is able to deny you leukemia coverage or contraception coverage or blood transfusions or any number of medical concerns that someone might have a religious objection to,” Fluke said. “So the folks who are still objecting [to the mandate] have some very extreme ideas about religious freedom and employee health care in this country.”

Her interview came on the liberal cable channel MSNBC.

ACOG Wants Doctors to Screen for “Reproductive Coercion”

 

By Wesley J. Smith, J.D

 When a husband hides a wife’s birth control pills or a boyfriend takes off a condom in the middle of sex in hopes of getting an unwilling girlfriend pregnant, that’s a form of abuse called “reproductive coercion.” While researchers don’t know exactly how common such coercion is, it’s common enough — especially among women who are abused by their partners in other ways — that health care providers should screen women for signs at regular check-ups and pregnancy visits, says the nation’s leading group of obstetricians and gynecologists.

“We want to make sure that health care providers are aware that this is something that does go on and that it’s a form of abuse,” said Veronica Gillispie, an obstetrician and gynecologist at Ochsner Health System, New Orleans, and a member of the committee that wrote the opinion for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in the February issue of the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology.
Well, reproductive coercion is a two-way street. As Bioedge notes, NPR has reported that about twice as many women engage in RC (8.7%) as men (4.8%).
Reproductive coercion is wrong no matter who does it, of course. But why do I think this is part of a larger overarching ideological agenda to intrude the technocracy into every area of American life–and most particularly, those of women. I mean, for all the talk about how powerful women now are, the technocracy clearly views many as helpless.

 article continues here

 Article from the Washington Post

LifeNews.com Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D., is a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture.